Thursday, January 30, 2014

Kati, my darling cat with the
beautiful face, we need to have another conversation. Kati, I fear you are
developing an eating disorder. You seem to be constantly hungry. Every time I
enter the kitchen you seem to believe you should be fed. You are obviously
getting fatter. That grieves me no end as I like you as you were before, sleek
and elegant, almost blue in the sunshine, energetic and gorgeous. I try not to
give in to your piteous whining. I know you cannot possibly be that hungry, but
you always win.

But our personal problems
aside, there are apparently those who are worse off than we are, billionaires
and multi-millionaires who feel they are being unfairly attacked because they
are rich. One of them, a particularly obnoxious billionaire, even went so far
as to claim he fears a Kristallnacht targeting them. You don’t remember
Kristallnacht, of course, as that was at least half a century before you were
born, maybe more. It was a terrible night when the Nazis attacked Jewish stores
and property, breaking windows, thieving, brutalizing, and so on. He thinks the
progressives are in the process of doing the same thing to the rich. He later
apologized for using the term Kristallnacht but it’s obvious he fears something
like that may happen to the rich. Personally, I think his fear may be a result
of his guilt although you would never know it because of his arrogance and
disregard for reality.

It is pretty obvious there is
unlikely ever to be a real Kristallnacht here. But it is not unlikely, I think,
there may eventually be a dramatic change in the tax code when the filthy rich
are finally made to pay their taxes. Not just their “fair share” but real
substantial taxes, perhaps even up to the ninety percent they paid under the
Eisenhower administration. The fact is that even if they paid that much in
taxes their life styles would probably not change much. I mean, after all, they
would still have their millions and billions, private airplanes, yachts, gold
faucets, Rolexes, and they would still be able to feast on unborn lamb and
thousand dollar truffles. They might have to reduce the number of their
mansions but it is unlikely they would truly suffer like the single moms that
can’t feed their children, or the children themselves who are ashamed to go to
school because of their rags. So pity the rich, they have it pretty hard these
days.

Not that anything like that
might happen to them. You might notice that neither Obama or anyone else is
seriously suggesting they might actually have to pay more taxes. The idea is
not to increase taxes on the wealthy but, rather, to throw a few more sardines
to the poor, to increase the pathetic minimum wage from $7.25 to the outrageous
$10.10 per hour. Wow, that’s really going to solve the gap between the
obscenely wealthy and the obscenely poor. It is absurd, on the face of it, that
any individual person in any society, should have a fortune of a billion or
more dollars while the majority lack even enough food to eat. I don’t believe
everyone should have the same amount of money but the current imbalance is so
great, so unnecessary, so unrealistic, so damaging it simply should not be
permitted. I don’t know how much is too much but there should be some kind of
formula that allows us to keep things on a much more even keel, so to speak.

The argument that those with
money are the job creators is utter nonsense. The idea of trickle- down
economics will work is even more nonsensical. I don’t know where this strange
economic theory originated but it was certainly put into play by Saint Ronnie
the Moron and we are suffering from it still. In spite of President Obama’s
speeches and promises it doesn’t appear to me any substantial changes are on
the way, the Banks and Wall Street are still in charge, the Insurance companies
and pharmaceuticals continue to rip us off as if there is no tomorrow, the
military/industrial/political complex still claims most of the national budget,
the poor continue to be poor although perhaps with a bit more oatmeal. Capitalism,
the greatest boon since the Black Plague continues. But not to worry, Superbowl
Sunday is imminent.

Capitalism has destroyed our belief in any
effective power but that of self interest backed by force.

Monday, January 27, 2014

I never thought I would be
defending Bill Clinton, the ex-President, “Big Dog,” Come Back Kid,” or however
you want him called. But as predatory (and opportunistic) politician Rand Paul
just labeled him a (sexual) predator I thought I must defend him, at least in
the Monica Lewinsky case.

Paul would have us believe,
as lots of people apparently do, that a sophisticated, powerful, and predatory
President took advantage of an innocent young lady intern in the White House.
It is true that he took advantage of an opportunity that was presented to him
and that was deplorable. But an innocent young intern, hardly. I have neither the
time nor inclination to go back and review the millions of words that were
written about this, but as I recall, Monica Lewinsky could hardly be described
as an innocent in this affair. First of all she was an adult (20) at the time
so it was a consenting affair between two adults. She was clearly not innocent
of sex, including oral sex, as she apparently told her friend (or friends) she
was “taking her knee pads with her,” when going to Washington, a remark the
meaning of which would have been quite obvious to them. There is also no doubt
that she flirtatiously, provocatively, and deliberately invited the President’s
interest, at least exposing her thong panties (and who knows what else).

If Rand Paul believes that 20
year-old young women from Southern California are innocents in the matter of
sex he must be very poorly informed. It was reported, for example, that High
School students were engaging in oral sex. In some cases, at least, a girl
could perform oral sex on several boys or men and still claim (reasonably?) to
be a virgin! I guess we might thank Hugh Hefner from converting what used to be
called by a very derogatory term into the more respectable “oral sex.” No less
an authority than Newt Gingrich himself is reported to have said he preferred
oral sex because it was not really “cheating,” and Arnold, the Gropenfuhrer, is
rumored to have said something very similar. In any case one would have to be naïve
indeed to believe that Clinton was the only politician in Washington to have
had sex in his office or with an intern. But in the Clinton/Lewinsky case
describing Clinton as a predator would seem to be far from the truth, no matter
what he might have been in other cases.

Lewinsky reportedly was
disappointed that Clinton did not have “real sex” (intercourse) with her. This
raises an interesting question. When Clinton said “it depends what the meaning
of “is, is,” he might well have said it depends upon what the meaning of “sex”
is. That is, if one interprets sex to be an act of intercourse between a male
and a female, Clinton told the truth when he said “I did not have sex with that
woman.” On the other hand if sex includes oral, anal, and even more esoteric
practices then he did have sex with Monica (or she with him).

Can it be the case that when
an older man, especially one in a position of power and authority, has sex with
a woman, especially a younger women, he is invariably a “predator?” Was John
Kennedy, for example, a known and dedicated womanizer, a predator? Remember it
was only when the Clinton/Lewinsky matter became known through the
unprecedented actions of the Republicans that the private lives of politicians
became a subject of such scrutiny, a situation that should have probably been
left as it was (the Starr report was an absolute obscenity). As Somerset Maugham once opined, “My own
belief is that there is hardly anyone whose sexual life, if it were broadcast,
would not fill the world at large with surprise and horror.”

Maugham was, of course, a homosexual,
but while on this awkward and unpleasant topic let me pose a further question:
if the concern is with oral, anal, and other esoteric sexual practices, rather
than the more traditional heterosexual form, does it matter if the partners are
of the same sex or not? Similarly, if the motive for apparently sexual behavior
is not really sexual gratification, is it really sex? For example, there are
seemingly homosexual behaviors in parts of New Guinea because it is believed
that in order to properly mature and become an adult it is necessary to ingest
semen. The young men and boys who are required to participate in these
activities do not become homosexuals (except perhaps in very rare instances).

In any case, whatever
President Clinton’s behavior might have been in general, describing him as a
predator in the Lewinsky case is far from reality. Furthermore, although it
seems to be rarely mentioned, females can be, and often are, just as predatory
as males, and they possess powers that transcend those of mere males.

Sunday, January 26, 2014

What do I know? Nothing much,
I fear. But as it has become clear that many of our elected officials
apparently know perhaps even less I have decided to continue blogging, at least
for the present.

Let me begin with some
comments on our foreign policy (if, indeed, we can be said to have any coherent
foreign policy). Let’s begin with Syria. There is an international meeting to
discuss the future of Syria. Iran, the primary ally of Syria, was not invited
to this meeting. Well, actually, they were invited by the head of the UN, but
the U.S. (all powerful and god like) intervened and had them disinvited. Does
this make any sense at all? Of course not, the future of Syria is not going to
be decided unilaterally by the U.S., in spite of Secretary of State Kerry’s
declaration that it must be so. Kerry, announced before the meeting began that
President Assad had to go and could have no role in a future government of
Syria. In order for Iran to participate in this meeting (in which they have a
vital national interest) they would have to agree with this outcome in advance.
In other words, agree to our already decided upon outcome or you cannot
participate, no matter what you like or what your national interest might be.
Is this not stupid, imperialistic, unreasonable, arrogant, and unacceptable to
not only Iran but the rest of the participants? Of course it is. And the U.S.,
in effect, is being told, rightly so, to go “piss up a rope.” Our attempt to
continue our hegemony in the Middle East is failing, just as it has already
failed in Latin America. The American empire is beginning to implode. Our
vaunted military superiority has repeatedly failed, in Korea, Viet Nam,
Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere as we cannot defeat even peasants armed with
small caliber rifles. Our estimated 5000 nuclear warheads are as useless as the
proverbial “tits on a boar.” Is it any wonder that Iran doesn’t even want such
useless and expensive weapons? I hesitate to say it, but the Iranians are much
smarter than we are.

Speaking of Iran, we seem to
be doing everything in our power to avoid a diplomatic solution to their non-problem of nuclear bombs. Even
while the negotiations are going on we have Kerry still threatening military action
against them should the negotiations fail, and, more importantly, many
Congresspersons insisting on devising more sanctions against them should they
fail to live up to their agreements, thus risking the failure of the attempt
before it can proceed. This assumes, of
course, that Iranians are untrustworthy, cannot be believed, do not want a
diplomatic solution, and are not acting in good faith, all false assumptions
based upon apparent racist beliefs about Arabs even though Iranians are not
Arabs, and Arabs are themselves, of course, not without honor and decency in
spite of American stereotypes.

There is another strange situation having to do with our
attempt to negotiate a peaceful solution to the Iran question. President Obama,
the elected leader of our nation, along with much of the military and others,
wants to attempt a diplomatic solution to the question of Iranian nuclear
activity. But many member of Congress insist upon trying to impose more
sanctions on Iran, sanctions that might well kill the diplomacy prematurely
and, in fact, lead to war. The primary opponent of a diplomatic solution is, of
course, Israel, who not only opposes the attempt but has lobbied for war
against Iran for years. It is not beyond imagination to see a situation where
Congress could impose crippling sanctions against Iran, thus ending the
diplomacy, and eventually leading to unimaginable hostilities in the Middle
East. But if U.S. policy, represented by the President desires diplomacy, and
the Congress, representing Israel, does not, where does Congressional loyalty
lie, with Israel or the U.S.? And if their loyalties favor Israel over the U.S.
is that not potentially treasonous? This begs the question for the moment of
why so many Congresspersons in the U.S. continue to uncritically support a
nation known to be internationally criminal, racist, genocidal, apartheid, and
imperialistic. What is even more unbelievable is that some want to pass
legislation requiring the U.S. to support Israel should that country
unilaterally attack Iran, essentially putting U.S. foreign policy in the hands
of another country! If this is not insanity I do not know what you might call
it.

Paradoxically, as the U.S. Empire slowly collapses around
the world, as it surely will, the U.S. itself will grow increasingly better.
When all that money comes home, the phony “defense budget” shrinks, and we
begin to actually rebuild our infrastructure, tackle global warming, education,
unemployment, poverty, and yes, even health care, there could be an amazing,
even unprecedented American renaissance.
This certainly will not happen if Israel
is allowed to dictate our policy in the Middle East and the mindless
Congressional hawks get their way.

“There is some good in this world, and
it's worth fighting for.”J.R.R. Tolkien

Monday, January 20, 2014

Where is Jim Dandy when we
need him? New Jersey Fats is desperately in need. The Palestinians are
desperately in need. John Boehner is desperately in need. In fact, and much
more importantly, the human species is desperately in need, but our hero, Jim
Dandy, is nowhere to be found. Unfortunately, if he ever shows up, he will be,
I fear, too late.

Jim Dandy is certainly too
late to rescue me from my penultimate funk. I have been unable to blog for quite
some time as there seems to me no point to it. Nothing much happens, the world
drags on day to day to the fast approaching “last syllable of recorded time,”
as soon there will be no one to record the final and well deserved passing of
the human species. If we have not drowned in our own filth, or expired from
nuclear radiation, or succumbed to global warming, or starved to death for the
benefit or entertainment of the one percent, perhaps something really bad may
happen.

The human species, presumably
on top of the food chain, the great chain of being, the apex of civilization,
the heights of evolution, the darling of God’s eye, is an absolute dismal
failure, unable or unwilling to manage their affairs, incapable of even the
most basic of social tasks, oblivious to their own stupidity, morally bankrupt,
and on an accelerating path to oblivion. Try as I might I cannot see it
differently. I am on the very brink of hopelessness.

I have been aware, of course,
that things were not going well for humans, that greed has become the most
basic human value, that profit has become more important than human life, that
inequality no matter how outrageous was now regarded as acceptable, that untold
millions were doomed to poverty while the one percent were deserving while
others were not, why poverty was the fault of the poor, why capital was more
important than labor, and why, by some bizarre quirk of thought, not working
has become more desirable than working at all levels of society. That is, the
rich do not work as they do not have to, while the poor prefer not to work
because of the untold riches they receive from the government.

I had become accustomed to
this state of affairs however obscene and disgusting it is. I knew that the
five or six Walmart heirs together possessed more money than forty or fifty
percent of all other Americans, that there were, in fact, not only billionaires
but multi-billionaires, and that inequality was just a fact of life. When I was
younger we marveled at millionaires, the word billionaire was never even
mentioned (an ice cream cone was a nickel, a movie or hamburger was a dime, a
hundred dollars a month was a living wage).

When I learned today that 85
people together possess more wealth than three billion plus others on planet
earth (I have no reason to believe this is not true) I realized it is all over
for us (humans, that is). To me this is demonstrable proof that the human
species is bereft of intelligence, oblivious to immorality, unconcerned with
human life, and even unconcerned with the tiny planet that sustains them.
Having now abused and raped the earth there is talk of colonizing Mars. Good
luck with that, mindless, parasitical, bloodsuckers.

Monday, January 13, 2014

It appears that more and more
Senators are joining the bandwagon for more sanctions on Iran even though the
White House is opposed and President Obama has threatened to veto any such
legislation. It is not all Republicans calling for more sanctions, both Chuck
Schumer and Cory Booker, and some other Democrats as well are in favor of
sanctions, even though the President has said more sanctions at this time would
be both inopportune and possibly deadly to the diplomacy.

One would certainly have to
wonder at the motives involved in this attempt to sabotage the negotiations (if
not, indeed, the sanity of the proponents). Why would anyone in Congress
apparently favor potentially starting another illegal, unconstitutional, and
unnecessary war in the Middle East when there is a very good chance for a
diplomatic solution? It is, of course, Israel that is the most adamant about
sabotaging the negotiations, having repeatedly failed to force the United
States to attack Iran for them. They claim they are afraid of Iran’s nuclear
program, afraid Iran will produce a bomb, afraid Iran will attack them with it,
and so on. But that is just an excuse as Israel, the U.S., and the entire world
knows that could never happen because of the already existing possibly 400 such
bombs in Israeli hands and the thousands more in the U.S. The real problem is
who is to have hegemony in the Middle East.

In any case, consider what is
involved here. Israel has committed numerous war crimes against the
Palestinians and continues to do so. The International Community has repeatedly
criticized Israel for illegal settlements, stealing Palestinian land and water,
herding a million or more into the tiny Gaza strip, withholding supplies, even
regulating what can have to eat, assassinating Palestinian leaders, killing
Palestinian children, destroying Palestinian orchards, bulldozing their homes,
and reportedly torturing Palestinian captives. These things are known, they are
not myths and lies. The U.S. has shamefully gone along with what is little more
than the slow genocide or, at least, attempted ethnic cleansing Israel has been
attempting for years. There is no doubt the Israeli government is a racist,
apartheid state. It is also no secret that Israel does not want a Palestinian
state of any kind, preferring the status quo that allows them to continue
slowly encroaching and building settlements on land that should be part of a
Palestinian state. It is clear this is a strategy to make it impossible for a
viable Palestinian state to ever be created. There is no doubt the Palestinians have
suffered dreadfully at the hands of the Israelis and continue to do so.

The Senators that now want to
sabotage the negotiations by passing even more onerous sanctions on Iran, on
behalf of Israel, must be aware of the criminality and immorality of all this.
And yet they all want to do what Israel wants them to do. That is, continue the
immorality and criminality of the state of Israel, and apparently to hell with
the Palestinian and Iranian people. Why are they doing this? They say, of
course, that sanctions are needed to put further pressure on Iran even though
the President and others fear further sanctions at this time will potentially
kill the diplomacy, reveal the bad faith of the U.S., and quite possibly lead
to war. The answer, my friend, is “blowing in the wind,” it’s money, and lots
of it. Certainly Schumer and Booker are getting money from Israeli supporters,
and there is no doubt that many more, certainly Menendez, are as well. In other
words, they are apparently unconcerned about Israeli war crimes and mendacity,
unconcerned about the fate of the Palestinians and Iranians, but vitally
concerned with the size of their war chests. They are selling their honesty and
morality, even their souls for money, they are basically high-level, hypocritical
prostitutes. Unless, that is, they don’t believe the truth about Israel which
at this point in time is well known to all the rest of the world and seems
highly unlikely. Whatever else you think about President Obama, if he can stand
up to the Israeli warmongers and prevent a war with Iran, he should be given
great credit for it.

“Prostitutes operate more responsible than
governments; because when you pay them, they do everything to keep you
satisfied.”

Thursday, January 09, 2014

For a very long time I have
thought of myself as an atheist, an ardent believer in evolution, and a true
foe of the idea of “creative design.” Of late I have begun having second
(third, fourth, fifth, and sixth) thoughts on the subject. The main reason for
my possible change of heart has to do with the nagging doubt that the natural
process of evolution could have produced anything as utterly ridiculous and
awful as the human species.

Nowhere in nature, as far as
I know, is there another species so arrogant, short-sighted, mean spirited,
greedy, violent, self-destructive and irrational. The human species is unique
in these respects. While it is true that some animal species sometimes fight
over territory, and often fight over mating, they do not completely destroy each
other, and they certainly do not invent horrendous ways to torture, humiliate,
and massively kill each other. Nor do they deliberately foul their own nests or
ordinarily exhaust the resources they depend on for their very survival.
Although human and near-human groups have existed for many thousands of years
they still have not been able to live in peace with one another and their continuous
history of violence, stupidity, theft, torture, and brutality is unrivaled by
anything else we can even imagine. The history of European colonialism by
itself is enough to make you doubt the sanity of the species, let alone what
happened prior to that terrible period of time. It is as if the species were
put on earth for no purpose other than stealing, brutalizing, and killing each
other. It is a history so shocking we basically avoid ever telling the truth
about it. And it is not that things have changed much over time, the greed,
theft, torture, and killing, continue to the present day.

As there is nothing else like
this in history, or in the natural order of nature, it makes one wonder how and
why this completely unique species could have come about. Einstein said that
“God does not play dice with the universe.” As he was a known atheist he did
not really believe in God, but he did believe the universe was orderly, playing
dice with it would have been out of the question for him. But it seems to me
the only place in the universe that might well be out of order has to do with
the behavior of the human species. Where one might suspect that reason would
prevail among humans it clearly does not. Where it is perfectly obvious that
certain activities are clearly not in the best interest of human survival they
continue nonetheless. When humans praise peace and goodwill to all they clearly
do not mean it. When they say “do not kill” they are apparently joking.
Virtually the only thing about the world that is neither predictable nor
orderly is human behavior, which is predictable only in the sense that it will
be unpredictable in any given circumstance, especially when it has to do with
humans and the environment. So it is that humans completely decimated the
billions of passenger pigeons in a relatively short time, almost did the same
to the untold millions of buffalo, destroyed many of the salmon runs, polluted and
overfished the rivers, lakes, and oceans, and continue to destroy one species
after another. In addition they have either destroyed or pillaged virtually all
of the natural resources, many of which are non-renewable.

Einstein I fear was not much
of a crapshooter. God does not place dice with the universe as god does not play dice by himself. If there are
multiple gods, however, that might be a different matter entirely. The
existence of the human species might be little more than a fantastic cosmic
dice game played by the gods for their entertainment. They might have looked
around for a relatively stable ecosystem and placed bets on what would happen
if they introduced a species with no instincts but the ability to make their
own choices. Earth, being a tiny, inconsequential globe spinning around a
lesser sun was a perfect setting for such an experiment (game), just part of
their playground. It appears at the moment those who bet humans would destroy
the system and themselves are winning. The game is not entirely over but the
end is drawing near. I bet it’s at least 8 to five for those betting against
the species. Will they win? Roll the dice, man, “Baby needs a new pair of
shoes.”

It is entirely possible of course the gods are not merely
playing a game. They could have a perfectly legitimate scientific interest in
what happens when idiocy is introduced into an otherwise smoothly functioning
world. After all, they must be responsible for hundreds, thousands, maybe even
millions of other inhabited planets. Maybe earth is merely a test case. Who
knows, it is beyond my crumbling brainpower.

Wednesday, January 08, 2014

What do freedom and
capitalism have in common? In the most fundamental way possible they are both
antithetical to human social life, in the case of freedom relatively so, in the
case of capitalism, absolutely so.

"Man is born free, and everywhere he is in
chains. One man thinks himself the master of others, but remains more of a
slave than they are."

Roussea thought this was so
because of the corrupting influence of society and, in a sense, it is. He felt
it was necessary for humans to revert to a more natural way of life if they
were to live more peacefully and achieve freedom.

While it might well be so
that living closer to nature allows one more freedom than living in a more
complicated society, there is no known society that allows its citizens
unlimited freedom. Even in the most “primitive” societies, such as Australian
aborigines or Bushmen/Hottentots, there are cultural proscriptions as well as
prescriptions people must abide and live by if their members are going to
survive and live in relative peace. Obviously some societies allow their
citizens more freedom than others but nowhere is one allowed absolute freedom.
Thus you are relatively “in chains” simply by virtue of being born into a
social group and living as a human being.

But nowhere in small,
face-to-face communities, in which humans traditionally lived for thousands of
years, was there anything comparable to capitalism. The New Guinea “Big Man,”
who became “big” because of his organization of huge feasts and gifts of pork,
or his skill as a warrior, did not result in his material well being becoming
much greater than others, he acquired reputation rather than wealth. Similarly,
the Northwest Coast chief who organized huge potlatches and distributed gifts
of blankets and other things did not benefit himself materially. In such
exchanges there was no “profit” or “profit motive” involved. Indeed, in such
societies if an individual attempted to gain at the expense of others he or she
would be ostracized and, in extreme case, even murdered. Shameful greed simply
was not allowed to exist. There was no capitalism.

As societies grew in size and
complexity, some individuals managed to convince the masses they were more
powerful and entitled to more, often much, much more, than others. Beliefs in
the divine right of kings were enshrined allowing royalty to help themselves to
whatever was available. More often than not royalty was bestowed upon those who
were, in fact, more powerful than others, wars were the order of the day, might
established right, and right meant that everyone had their fixed place in the
order of things, peasants and serfs were just that, and nobles likewise held
more or less fixed positions in society. Still there was no real profit motive
or capitalism as we now have.

When you have a well
established profit motive and excessive freedom as in “free market capitalism”
you have reached the epitome of an essentially antisocial society, a true
oxymoron. You have, in fact, repudiated your human status and reverted back to
“the law of the jungle,” a form of primitive Darwinism in which greedy humans
cannibalize each other for profit and the losers are cast aside as “collateral
damage.” The most basic elements of humanity: empathy, caring for others,
community, the basic social contract itself, are simply abandoned as everyone
now competes for profit and power, two linked passions that will slowly and
inevitably destroy whatever is left of
our humanity and, indeed, our lives.

Thursday, January 02, 2014

Well, Kati, what with
Christmas, New Year’s Eve and all, we have scarcely had time for even a quiet
chat. Happily all of that is over, at least for another year. Reflecting back
now it certainly was a difficult year for us and the country also.

We managed to get through a
whole year without Linda, our strong “house post” for so many years. I wasn’t
sure just how we would manage without her, but we did. I now know how to do
many things I could never do before: manage the washer/dryer, scrub the floors,
use the dishwasher, pay the bills, vacuum floors, even make the bed (my least
favorite task). Even worse, are the problems with having to deal with the
computer, printer, and phone without Linda’s help. I know, Kati, this doesn’t
sound like much, but when you are 80 years of age and unfamiliar with such
domestic tasks it’s not as easy as you might think. I can now appreciate how it
is that Linda could do in an hour what it takes me a day to do. Better,
however, my cooking has improved immeasurably and I have resisted the
temptation to take the easy way out, frozen dinners, pizza, and all that. There
is, I have learned, an inordinate amount of waste involved when cooking for one
person, but it is still worth it. As an aside, Kati, and I don’t want to upset
you, but I notice you are getting heavier and losing your beautiful, lithe,
shapely cat figure (like me). Perhaps this is an inevitable part of the aging
process.

I guess it is fair to say
that we had a pretty good year. But you can’t say the same thing for the
nation, what with the government shutdown, the constant squabbling over
everything, the dysfunctional Congress, the basically racially based opposition
to anything President Obama has tried to do to ease unemployment, create jobs,
deal with guns and immigration, infrastructure, and avoid a completely
wrongheaded war with Iran. While I don’t approve of his drone warfare, his
support of Wall Street and Israel, and his failure to prosecute our known war
criminals, if he can manage to keep Israel and the Saudis from leading us into
another war in the Middle East, he will have accomplished a basically Herculean
task. If he could manage to solve the Israeli/Palestinian problem he would have
accomplished the impossible, but, of course, this is not going to happen as
long as Israel is In charge of our Middle East policy and our Congresspersons
seem to think the slow Israeli genocide of the Palestinians is somehow “God’s
will.”

There are signs that things
may be about to change. The shameful inequalities of wealth seems to have only
recently been noted, there are increasing numbers of strikes, the minimum wage
is now seriously on the agenda, more and more people will have health insurance
(not the best but better than before), the economy seems to be picking up, the
deficit is going down, the filibuster is not so easy to abuse as it has been,
and maybe, just maybe, some progress might be made on gun control and
immigration. But Kati, you know you cannot count on anything happening for
sure. Some say, for example, the Republicans may capture control of the Senate,
keep control of the House, the full catastrophe. Personally, I fail to
understand why anyone, except for a few racist rednecks, would ever vote
Republican after their shameful performances of the last five or more years.
But, Kati, no one ever accused the electorate of sagacity and they do have a
record of voting against their own best interests. Sometimes, my little grey
bundle of joy, mischief, and appetite, I wish I was a cat.

The French, God Bless ‘em,
may be a nation of romantics, but they are also very practical minded. They are
going to tax people who make too much money at 75%. We should do the same, but
make it 90%.

If it looks like a Joe
McCarthy, talks like a Joe McCarthy, and acts like a Joe McCarthy, is it a real
Joe McCarthy, or just a fake?